Indeed, Chief Public Prosecutor, Anupam Gupta during the hearings for police remand for Bansal too had expressed apprehensions when he told the courtthat "there is tremendous pressure from both within and outside the legal system on the investigating agency. It is up against a very powerful, intelligent and well connected nexus that involves higher members of the judiciary." Is that why in the FIR registered by the CBI, no judge has been named?
Though the Chandigarh police did a commendable job in extracting vital information out of Bansal, eventually the case became too hot a potato for it. In his status report presented to Governor Rodrigues and CJ Thakur, Senior Superintendent of Police Chandigarh, SS Srivastava states, "Some judges elevated to higher courts have been practicing as advocates in Chandigarh and the UT police officials have been interacting with some of them. In such a situation the action of the police will always remain under scanner and despite working in a bonafide manner, motives with be attributed to all its actions." It is reliably learnt that this report formed the basis for handing the case to the CBI.
As the sensational case unfolded in the Chandigarh district courts, the actions of another senior High Court judge, Justice KS Garewal, was objected to by the public prosecutor Gupta. Just as arguments in the remand hearing on august 26th had concluded and the magistrate had reserved pronouncement of orders, Justice Garewal landed in the lower courts, prompting a furious Gupta to say:"As the magistrate is under the disciplinary control of the High Court, Justice Garewal's visit is a grave breach of judicial propriety and impacts tangibly on the judicial independence of the magistrate." If the prosecution was feeling the pressure from several quarters, the district bar added its mite in intimidating it. Gupta and his associates were severely heckled and booed by lawyers, supportive of Bansal. In fact the first day that Bansal was produced in court, as many as 30 odd lawyers stood up to defend him.
With the matter now in the hands of the CBI, quiet has been restored to Chandigarh's courts. Justice Nirmal Yadav who has claimed innocence, does not attend court. Perhaps the Chief Justice will wait for the report of thein-house committee before taking any further action? The last word though, is yet to be heard on this controversial issue. The investigators in the Chandigarh police believe that what they have uncovered so far, is only the tip of the proverbial iceberg. If the past records of the Punjab and Haryana High Court are anything to go by, there is little hope for optimism.
Cases of judicial impropriety surface with disquieting regularity at this High Court. Justice V Ramaswamy who was almost impeached in 1993, was a judge here before he was elevated to the Supreme Court. In 2002 Justice Arun B Saharaya stripped three judges of the High Court of work for their alleged role in the jobs scandal involving Punjab Public Service Commission chief Ravi Sidhu. One of them later took premature retirement. In April 2004, as many as 25 judges of the High Court went on mass leave in protest against the then Chief Justice BK Roy who had issued show cause notices to two judges for having taken membership of a controversial resort, the Forest Hill Country Club and Resort.And now, this!